Sandys V. Pincus: Expansion of the Rales Test and Lowering of Threshold for Lack of Independence in the Demand Futility Context

By | Louisiana Law Blog | April 28, 2017
Delaware By David P. Hamm, Jr. In Sandys v. Pincus, the Delaware Supreme Court reversed a “thoughtful forty-two page opinion” by Chancellor Bouchard that dismissed a derivative action based upon the stockholder’s failure to make pre-suit demand.[1] The court’s opinion can be found hereView Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus

Menu Labeling On Hold – Again

It appears the FDA is again pushing back the compliance date for its menu labeling regulations, which had been set for May 5, 2017.  Although the agency has not yet made an announcement of the 11th-hour delay, on Thursday it submitted an interim final rule to the White House Office of Management and Budget that signaled an extension. View Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus

New Private Right of Action in Canada for False or Misleading Electronic Advertising

This alert has been prepared in collaboration with Canada’s Fasken Martineau law firm. Mr. Di Domenico is a partner and regional chair of the firm’s Antitrust/Competition & Marketing Group in Toronto. Chris Cole is Co-Chair of Crowell’s Advertising & Product Risk Management Group in Washington, D.C. View Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus

Federal Government Must Pay $41.6M for Negligent Forceps Delivery

A Pennsylvania judge recently entered a $41.6 million verdict against the federal government after an obstetrician employed by a federally-funded health clinic negligently used forceps to deliver a baby. The baby suffered severe permanent brain damage as a result. The lawsuit claimed that the obstetrician applied excessive force and traction and misapplied the forceps on the baby’s skull while performing a mid-forceps delivery, causing catastrophic neurological injury to the baby. View Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus

If You Expect to Work in the Family-Owned Business for Life, Be Sure to Get It in Writing

Family-owned businesses often employ multiple family members. Even if there is an expectation that employment will continue indefinitely, the company and the family member employees both usually reserve the right, explicitly or implicitly, to terminate the employment “at-will,” meaning at any time and for any reason.  View Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus

Rules Regarding Commission Compensation Just Got More Complicated

In the wake of a recent California Court of Appeals decision, the Vaquero case, employers who pay employees on a commission basis should assure that they comply with the following rules in order to avoid potential liability: Compensate employees separately for time spent performing tasks not paid on commission –  If employees perform some work that is paid on a commission basis and other tasks that cannot generate commission income, employers must pay the employees separately for the time spent performing the latter work.  View Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus

Trump Administration’s April 18, 2017 Executive Order On the H-1B Process

By | Technology Employment Law | April 26, 2017
On Tuesday, April 18, 2017, the Trump Administration signed an Executive Order (“EO”) titled, Buy American and Hire American.  The EO directs the US Departments of Labor, Justice, State, and Homeland Security to look into ways to reform the current H-1B process used by companies, but in particular, the hi-tech industry, to prevent fraud and abuse. View Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus

Investment Canada Act: New Threshold for the Review of Direct Investments

By | Competition Chronicle | April 26, 2017
Effective April 24, 2017, the review threshold under the Investment Canada Act for an investment to directly acquire control of a Canadian business (i) by a WTO investor (that is not a state-owned enterprise) and (ii) by a non-WTO investor (that is not a state-owned enterprise) where the Canadian business that is the subject of the investment is, immediately prior to the implementation of the investment, controlled by a WTO investor has been increased from $600 million to $800 million in enterprise value. View Full Post
Tweet Like LinkedIn LinkedIn Google Plus